Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Blockchain representation

I've seen a few different variations of involving blockchain in politics, but one, out of San Fransisco no less, suggests using it for representation as follows:

Every voting citizen can "assign" their vote to someone else - anyone else - to represent their interests. Presumably someone similarly aligned, but more dedicated and better informed. Those people who are assigned votes can also "assign" their entire block of votes on to someone else - and so on and so forth. So some people could chose to individually involve themselves (but have next to no influence) and other "Super-voters" might represent millions of constituents. All of it would be managed using block-chain ledgers. At any time, any individual may reassign their representation.

So your spouse might assign their vote to you. You assign your vote(s) on to your good friend, who is far more politically vested then you. He in turn, assigns it to a radio personality he follows, who assigns all those vote(s) to a politician he currently backs. Politician later makes a dumb tweet, and the radio personality reassigns the entire block of votes to someone else.

This could also be done on a local level e.g. substitution for primaries.

So, without expressing my opinion, seeing what everyone's position is on the matter.

1) Sounds less to do with block chain, and more to do with cap and trade.

They're borrowing a phrase from a popular digital coin- this is all about being relevant, right?
But blockchain is a method this could be accomplished (technology wise)

Originally Posted by Irving

2) Is this not a loose representation of how the government currently works? I thought a person more vested in politics was called a "politician."

I think that would be the end game if Democrats are behind it.... they're still pissed that Hillary got the popular vote (thanks to droves of sheeple in urban areas wanting to guarantee their "gov't cheese").. so why stop with just elections?
Eventually everybody could vote on every bill using blockchain... mob rule! (and true democracy- which has real problems with mob rule)

Originally Posted by Irving

3) ETA I assume the reason you're withholding your opinion is because you've already throat punched the dummy who suggested this and you're trying to keep a low profile to avoid assault charges.

This is the quote of the day, as far as I'm concerned.

Last edited by 68Charger; 03-14-2018 at 06:17.

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ, we are the III%, CIP2, and some other catchphrase meant to aggravate progreSSives who are hell bent on taking rights away...

I understand what block chain is, but it's not like it's required to do this. Block chain is about accurate record keeping. This suggestion is about changing the way voting is done. The person/people suggesting this are devious.

Blockchain is also a great way to prevent voter fraud. It's also about the safest digital means for voting possible based on the methodology described here.

Basically, you're both streamlining the current system by going digital & making it more secure by using blockchain. It would also get younger voters involved & given how quickly one can change their votes it's an easier way to hold politicians accountable.

The more you understand about blockchain technology the more sense that theory makes since it's similar to how we currently do things only with a lot more confusion, paper waste & fraud.

Blockchain was created to maintain integrity of transactions over the lifecycle of a "thing" of value. Once an election has passed the vote has no value. The vote could still be corrupted when the votes are created and digitally assigned to a voter at the root. How do we match one vote to one person and know that person is a real valid voter? I don't see how that solves the voter fraud problem.

The limited value Democracy has (we are not a Democracy) is in allowing self-determination and enforcing accountability. This is nullified the further a citizen gets from a representative. Hence the UN... A scheme to put all global citizens a huge step away from policy makers.

Vote aggregators who makes decisions for groups of people? No thanks. There are too many petty tyrants as it is. I actually think there should be more direct to voter referenda on the issues and "professional" law making. That's why we have TABOR in CO.

I think there should be one vote per tax paying (net) household in all elections. It should be certified and match the names of the people on the deed which confirm eligibility and district. The voters should physically present themselves at a polling place, on election day, to cast their votes.

Will blockchain do as good a job as the elderly poll monitoring volunteers do in being polite and giving me my "I voted" sticker?

As noted above, this is just a new technology being used to sell a different style of representative government. I have no problem with the technology but I am disturbed by the large percentage of citizens who don't value or exercise their right/responsibility to directly influence their government. I earned my franchise and respect the sacrifice made by others to ensure my right. I'm not giving a proxy to anyone.

Partners

Partners

About Us

We are dedicated to information and ideas pertaining to the AR-15 platform, as well as other firearms and related topics. Our members are from diverse backgrounds; this improves discussions by providing unique exchanges. While Colorado based, we have members from around the nation and internationally. We embrace the undeniable Right of the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights for all free people to own and possess firearms. New Members: Please read the site rules, the site FAQ, the Announcements & represent yourself honestly.